YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[trofirhen]

Oh well, nice to see someone is benefitting with new routes. Not Vancouver at the moment. Three guesses where. A sign of future trends, no doubt - like when the 787s roll out maybe .......

http://www.routesonline.com/news/36/the-...r-canada-brings-more-flights-to-toronto/

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Hourglass

Actually, I think you'll find a lot of India-bound traffic already heads east via Europe. Air Canada works with Lufthansa with FRA as the transit hub. Try doing a search on expedia.ca. You'll find most options to, say, Delhi, are east-bound. From personal observation, I know CX also gets a lot of transit traffic to India.

I agree the 787s could be a game changer, and it'll be interesting to see how AC deploys them.

From Vancouver, I think it's a real mix. Cathay Pacific (Hong Kong), Air China(Beijing), Air India (via Toronto) are all viable possibilities.

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Oh well, nice to see someone is benefitting with new routes. Not Vancouver at the moment. Three guesses where. A sign of future trends, no doubt - like when the 787s roll out maybe...

I'm not so sure. Those aren't new routes, they're just increasing capacity. They are also upgrading their YYZ-NRT flight to a 777, not a new route.

They have a finite number of planes, so that just means they're switching the planes. They tried YVR-HND, remember, but it didn't sell well so they nixed it. Just as well, really. The Tsunami really dampened tourism for a few months.

[Gordon]

How about yVR KIX Delhi

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Gordon

How about yVR KIX Delhi

Sounds OK to me, but I'd be interested to see the actual distance compared to a more direct, "over the pole" route such as Jet Airways or Air India could provide. Distance (as in km) equals dollars - and time, of course. It's that simple.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Chikinlittle

From my personal conversations with Emirates staff, they tell the company story as per what is mentioned in the Wikipedia write-up on the airline, stating that the company started with $10m from the royal family to start-up (allowing for procurement of two aircraft), under the premise that they weren't allowed to come back for more and they needed to stand on their own legs.

From what I am reading and hearing, there are merely suspicions that there are hidden subsidies provided to EK raised from nature of the close relationships that the airline has with the Airport Authority and the Royal Family. I haven't personally found much detail (not to say it doesn't exist out there) in supporting evidence to show the existence of any said subsidies.

If subsidies do exist somewhere in a smokescreen, then I do think as a nation we need to play it cautiously in how we let them fly within our borders, making sure that they don't cannibalize our own airline industry. However, not granting them ANY further access I think is likely not the answer and probably crosses the line and actually hinders, not helps, Canada as a whole.

Originally Posted by Chikinlittle

And yes, a simple Google search can provide for interesting discovery:

http://www.emirates.com/us/english/image...Facts%20August%20FINAL_tcm272-557688.pdf

They're quite defensive about it... even combative in their defense.

Like, yeah. I agree with your balanced answer to this for sure.

Other nations subsidize their own airlines anyway, as pointed out in the link you posted (even if Emirates published it in their own self-defense)

What I don't understand is: BY TAKING WHICH ROUTES away from Canadian airlines would Emirates "cannibalize" our airline industry? I don't get it. Most of our traffic seems either Transborder, East Asian, or European, none of which would (as I perceive it at the moment) be anywhere in the catchment area of Dubai anyway. Where's the monstrous threat?

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Sounds OK to me, but I'd be interested to see the actual distance compared to a more direct, "over the pole" route such as Jet Airways or Air India could provide. Distance (as in km) equals dollars - and time, of course. It's that simple.

YVR-KIX-DEL : 13445 km
YVR-DEL : 11143 km

I don't believe you can fly direct to India over the pole due to ETOPS rules. 2-engined planes can't fly over large uninhabited swaths of land... they have to be within a certain time in minutes from an airport they can land at. I don't know what the limitations of AC's fleet, but I've included both 60 minute ETOPS and 120 minute in those links.

Someone with more knowledge of how it works can probably explain it better than I can.

[MalcolmTucker]

A330s and 777s are 180 minutes and beyond ETOPS (certification isn't automatic for every carrier however and depends on maintenance, airline experience).

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

YVR-KIX-DEL : 13445 km
YVR-DEL : 11143 km

I don't believe you can fly direct to India over the pole due to ETOPS rules. 2-engined planes can't fly over large uninhabited swaths of land... they have to be within a certain time in minutes from an airport they can land at. I don't know what the limitations of AC's fleet, but I've included both 60 minute ETOPS and 120 minute in those links.

Someone with more knowledge of how it works can probably explain it better than I can.

If an airline can't do that, the how come Emirates, Jet Airways, (and Air India?) already do that from Toronto, and Qatar Airways from Montreal ? ? ? ? ?

The Arctic route is shorter (and cheaper in fuel and concommitant passenger fares) So why not from Vancouver "over the top" to Delhi, too?

WTF ! : pretty soon EMIRATES will be flying the northern route to Dubai, so where does this ETOPS ruling fit in, and how??

Baffling.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

If an airline can't do that, the how come Emirates, Jet Airways, (and Air India?) already do that from Toronto, and Qatar Airways from Montreal ? ? ? ? ?

The Arctic route is shorter (and cheaper in fuel and concommitant passenger fares) So why not from Vancouver "over the top" to Delhi, too?

WTF ! : pretty soon EMIRATES will be flying the northern route to Dubai, so where does this ETOPS ruling fit in, and how??

Baffling.

ETOPS is for twin-engine planes. Basically, because you have very little redundancy, you have to fly within a certain number of minutes from a habitable area.

747s and the A380s Emirates use have four engines. If you start having engine problem or an engine dies in the middle of nowhere, you can still fly the plane (with 75% thrust) for a longer time.

If you start having engine trouble on a twin-engine plane, you risk losing 50% of your thrust and the entire side of your plane.

That being said, as Malcolm mentioned the 777s can fly further than 180 minutes but it's not automatic and depends on the carrier.

While Air Canada has some 777s that fly long ranges, I'm not sure they would want to use one on an India route. For a few reasons, I'm guessing:

• They couldn't quickly change this route to a 767-sized plane to reflect seasonal demand changes
• They would have to drop the route suddenly if the 777 went in for maintenance or went out of commission
• ETOPS regulations may prevent them from doing so

I don't know if those are the actual reasons, but that's what comes to my mind. I'm sure there are technical challenges when flying over the pole and most of Air Canada's fleet is aging. I bet Air Canada would LOVE to have a direct route from Vancouver on a 767-sized plane. They're waiting for the 787... which will have the range and size to make it profitable.

[vanlaw]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

If an airline can't do that, the how come Emirates, Jet Airways, (and Air India?) already do that from Toronto, and Qatar Airways from Montreal ? ? ? ? ?

The Arctic route is shorter (and cheaper in fuel and concommitant passenger fares) So why not from Vancouver "over the top" to Delhi, too?

WTF ! : pretty soon EMIRATES will be flying the northern route to Dubai, so where does this ETOPS ruling fit in, and how??

Baffling.

Emirates YYZ-DXB and I assume the Etihad and Qatar flights as well - dont go over the top. They take a high "normal" eurpoean routing, crossing over southern Greenland then dropping over Germany, south-eastern Europe, Turkey and to UAE. On the return, it was a little further east, over Black Sea, Moldova and up to Scandinavia etc.

[trofirhen]

Regarding potential routes out of Vancouver, here's a link that might be interesting. YVR has a lot of potential to become a major air hub ... if some of these are implemented.

http://www.routesonline.com/airports/2539/vancouver-international-airport-yvr/opportunities/

[Spikester]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

ETOPS is for twin-engine planes.

My first of many trips to Boeing was during the tooling installation for the 777, and ETOPS certification was a hot topic back then. When I first asked a Boeing guy what it meant, he responded without a pause: "Engines Turn Or People Swim".

[hollywoodnorth]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Regarding potential routes out of Vancouver, here's a link that might be interesting. YVR has a lot of potential to become a major air hub ... if some of these are implemented.

http://www.routesonline.com/airports/2539/vancouver-international-airport-yvr/opportunities/

better link

http://airceo.com/2010/04/why-air-canada-needs-the-787/

you can clearly see the cities that will be in play for YVR with the new 787s for AC


767 vs 787 range for Vancouver

pic from http://airceo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/76787exYVR.gif

and


767 vs 787 range for Toronto

pic from http://airceo.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/76787exYYZ.gif

[ACT7]

My crystal ball tells me that Emirates will receive its daily rights to YYZ and additional slots beyond as soon as AC is able to deploy its 787's to India. This is all AC is freaking out about, no more, no less.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by ACT7

My crystal ball tells me that Emirates will receive its daily rights to YYZ and additional slots beyond as soon as AC is able to deploy its 787's to India. This is all AC is freaking out about, no more, no less.

You got it precisely. That's hitting the nail on the head!

[MalcolmTucker]

Emirates and the UAE burned a lot of bridges across the western world with what they did. Frankly there is little Canadian incentive for going back to the table, and we have already decided that Qatar and Kuwait are better partners anyways. I doubt we will see increased frequency to the UAE before the end of the decade.

UAE should drop the visa requirement as soon as practical and work on mending fences. First step would be to stop the hard sell - look where it has got them.

[ACT7]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Emirates and the UAE burned a lot of bridges across the western world with what they did. Frankly there is little Canadian incentive for going back to the table, and we have already decided that Qatar and Kuwait are better partners anyways. I doubt we will see increased frequency to the UAE before the end of the decade.

UAE should drop the visa requirement as soon as practical and work on mending fences. First step would be to stop the hard sell - look where it has got them.

I tend to disagree with that. Kuwait and Canada have had an open skies agreement for a few years now and neither AC nor Kuwait Airways have made a move to fly to any city. Qatar is of the same mentality as the UAE when it comes to landing rights in Canada, but like most younger siblings, they watched their older brothers implode with their tactics and have tried something completely different, i.e. they are building goodwill by flying into YUL first so the optics are better. Trust me, that flight is empty. EK and EY will come back to the table when AC starts to receive their 787's.

[trofirhen]

Don't know if this was posted before, but it might be interesting. I would think this thread is the most appropriate:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nati...smarter-tourism-strategy/article2207229/

The Globe and Mail. Oct 19, 2011

[twoNeurons]

Here's the interesting part from that article:

It’s long been clear that travel and trade are linked. But a recent study by Kiyong Keum, International Tourism and Trade Flows, published in the journal Tourism Economics, crunched the South Korean numbers and found that it’s usually increased tourism between countries that causes more trade – not the other way around. Promoting tourism from a country, it suggests, would increase trade.

But Canadian tourism problems were exposed by a soft U.S. market. It needs marketing in new places. New air routes encourage new tourists. But half of Canadian air trips go through the world’s most expensive airport to land a plane – Toronto’s Pearson. Other airports are losing domestic business to border airports such as the one in Plattsburgh, N.Y.

Canada’s immigration system aims to keep visitors from staying illegally or as asylum-seekers, so visitors from wealthy nations don’t need visas, but those from developing countries do. Tourists are discouraged by waiting. Now Canada needs to find a way to let new customers in more quickly.

There have been steps. The Canadian Tourism Commission shifted marketing to emerging markets. Canada finally completed a tourism deal with China that led to a big increase in trips – but also visa backlogs. That’s why the tourism industry was happy when Stephen Harper announced in a new air agreement with Brazil in August that three new visa offices were opened.

[mezzanine]

Anyone know if the american airlines YVR-DFW has wifi?